n 



Some Facts and 
Figures 

Relating to 

Local Taxation 

for 
Public Schools 




Published by the 

ALABAMA EDUCATION COMMITTEE. 

Montgomery, Ala. 



Some Facts and Figures 



Relating to Local Taxation 
For Public Schools 



A comparative study of the revenues provided 
for public education in the several states and 
territories of the Union is herewith present- 
ed. Expenditures for higher education in col- 
leges and universities are not included in these 
tables. Reference is made to the public schools 
only. 



Published by the 



Alabama Education Committee 

Montgomery. Alabama 



PARAGON PRESS 



• \ 



TO THE PUBLIC: 

^ Section 1685 of the code, enumerating the 
duties of the superintendent of education, says 
among other things, "He shall ***** 
elicit information relative to the system of 
public education in other states and countries, 
and disseminate all useful knowledge regard- 
ing the same, etc." The facts presented in 
this pamphlet were obtained for the most part 
from the last report, volume II, of the United 
States Commissioner of Education at Wash- 
ington. That the tables are absolutely relia- 
ble we have no reason to doubt. These sim- 
ple facts are presented without any lengthy 
comment. They speak for themselves. 

My purpose in arranging these tables and 
in publishing this pamphlet (without any ex- 
pense to the State) is to try to convince any 
one who may not already be convinced that 
the people of Alabama are entitled to have 
the privilege of supporting their own schools 
through local taxation by districts and by an 
increased county rate. 

The pages in the latter part of this pam- 
phlet showing the basis of taxation for the 
public schools in each of the several States 
of the Union are correct down to date of Jan- 
uary 15th, 1911. It will be seen that Alabama 
is in a class almost by itself in denying to the 
people the right of supporting local schools 
with local money. Surely the voting privilege 
in Alabama is reposed in as safe hands as it is 
in the other States. If there are counties and 
districts which do not need any additional 
revenue for their schools they would not be 
required to have it. Those counties and dis- 
tricts which do need this relief ought to be 
allowed to have it. 

Special attention is called to page 16 show- 
ing the percentage of our i^axes raised local- 
ly — by counties and districts — as compared 
with the percentage of local taxes raised for 
school purposes in the other states. That 
table covers the whole matter. 

Let the people have the chance of saying, 
In the regular election in November, 1912, 
whether they are willing to trust themselves 
with local taxing powers to assist the State in 
the support and maintenance of their own 
public schools. 

Superintendent of Education. 



(4) 



It is interesting to note on the neyt page 
the relatively small amount we are spending 
in public education. Evidently the people in 
northern, eastern and western states do not 
regard these expenditures as burdensome tax- 
ation. Probably they regard such money as 
a permanent investment. 



(5) 

WHOLE AMOUNT RAISED (1907-8) FOR 
EACH PERSON OF SCHOOL AGE. 

Nevada ^^'H 

Washington 42.60 

California 32.34 

Montana 30.69 

Colorado 29.36 

New York - 27.63 

Massachusetts 27.30 

Wyoming 24.16 

New Jersey 23.29 

Idaho 23.28 

N. Dakota 22.62 

Oregon 22.11 

Michigan 21.31 

Illinois 21.25 

Pennsylvania 21.16 

Connecticut 21.15 

Utah 20.76 

S. Dakota 19.96 

Ohio 19.69 

Minnesota 19.54 

Indiana 18.78 

Nebraska 18.63 

Iowa 18.37 

Arizona 17.89 

Vermont 17.79 

Rhode Island 17.58 

New Hampshire 17.32 

Maine 16.01 

Wisconsin 15.07 

Kansas 13.86 

Missouri 11.92 

West Virginia 11.30 

Maryland 9.81 

Delaware 9.51 

Florida 8.44 

New Mexico 8.16 

Texas 7.05 

Louisiana 6.70 

Virginia 5.52 

Arkansas 5.35 

Kentucky 5.30 

Tennessee 4.93 

Georgia 4.39 

North Carolina 3.65 

Alabama 3.30 

South Carolina 3.29 

Mississippi 3.21 



(6) 



Seven states have no form of compulsory at- 
tendance law. Alabama is one of them. This 
fact accounts, in a measure, for the compara- 
tively small percentage of Alabama children 
who actually attend school. 

Dividing our public school fund among 
those who do attend, we make a showing on 
the next page which prevents us becoming 
hilarious even if we do stand above five other 
states. 



(7) 



AVERAGE DAILY EXPENDITURE PER 

PUPIL BASED ON AVERAGE 

ATTENDANCE (1907-08) 

Cents 

1. Nevada 46.5 

2. North Dakota 34.4 

3. Montana 34.3 

4. Arizona 33.6 

5. California 30.3 

6. Wyoming 27.6 

7. New York 26.9 

8. Washington 26.8 

9. Colorado 26.3 

10. South Dakota 26.1 

11. New Jersey 25.5 

12. Minnesota 24.5 

13. Illnois 23.9 

14. Idaho 23.1 

15. Massachusetts 22.9 

16. Utah 22.5 

17. Ohio : 22.4 

18. Oregon 21.8 

19. Pennsylvania ....21.4 

20. Rhode Island 20.2 

21. Wisconsin 19.9 

22. Indiana 19.6 

23. New Hampshire 19.3 

24. Connecticut 19.1 

25. Nebraska 18.8 

26. Vermont 18.3 

27. Iowa 18.2 

28. Michigan 18.0 

29. Maine 17.9 

30. Missouri 17.3 

31. Kansas 16.8 

32. Oklahoma 15.7 

33. Louisiana 15.5 

34. New Mexico 15.5 

35. Florida 15.4 

36. West Virginia 14.6 

37. Texas 14.5 

38. Maryland 13.8 

39. Virginia 11.9 

40. Delaware 11.7 

41. Arkansas 11.4 

42. Kentucky 10.2 

43. Alabama 9.3 

44. North Carolina 9.2 

45. Georgia 8.8 

46. Tennessee 7.8 

47. South Carolina 7.2 

48. Mississippi 5.7 



(8) 



Sometimes we persuade ourselves to believe 
that we are already spending a due share of 
our means in providing for the education of 
our children. The table on the next page 
answers that question and the answer is 
against us. 



(9) 



AMOUNT EXPENDED FOR PUBLIC 

SCHOOLS ON EACH $100 OF TRUE 

VALUATION OF ALL REAL AND 

PERSONAL PROPERTY, 

1907-08. 

Amount in Cents 

1. Washington 38.6 

2. Utah 34.0 

3. Massachusetts 33.2 

4. Colorado 33.0 

5. South Dakota 32.9 

6. Vermont 32.6 

7. North Dakota 31.5 

8. West Virginia 30.1 

8. Indiana 30.1 

9. New York 29.8 

10. Idaho 29.1 

11. Michigan 27.9 

12. Wisconsin 27.8 

13. New Jersey 27.3 

14. Mississippi 27.1 

15. Maine 26.8 

15. Connecticut 26.8 

16. New Hampshire 26.6 

16. Ohio 26.6 

17. Iowa 26.4 

18. Missouri 26.3 

19. Kansas 25.2 

20. Illinois 24.7 

21. North Carolina 24.6 

22. Minnesota 24.1 

23. Nebraska 23.8 

24. Tennessee 23.6 

25. California 22.8 

26. Pennsylvania 22.7 

27. Rhode Island 22.6 

28. Florida _ 21.9 

28. Texas 21.9 

29. Arkansas 21.5 

30. Oklahoma 21.4 

31. Oregon 21.2 

32. South Carolina 20.3 

33. Georgia 19.2 

34. Maryland 18.2 

35. Kentucky 17.4 

36. Virginia 16.6 

36. Montana 16.6 

37. Louisiana 15.0 

38. Arizona 14.3 

39. Indian Territory 14.0 

40. Alabama 13.0 

41. Nevada 11.7 

42. New Mexico 10.6 

Delaware omitted. 
Wyoming omitted. 



(10) 



If the census of 1900 had neglected to re- 
port the illiteracy of whites and blacks sepa- 
rate, we might content ourselves with, think- 
ing that the presence of the negroes caused 
Alabama to be so near the bottom of the list. 
The next page referring only to gro-wn white 
men born in Alabama makes interesting read- 
ing and causes us to wonder what showing we 
shall make when the figures of the census of 
1910 are announced. 



(11) 

PER CENT. OF ILLITERATES (UNABLE 

TO WRITE) AMONG NATIVE WHITE 

ADULT MALES, 1900 

1. Washington State 5 

2. Nevada | 

3. Wyoming ° 

4. Montana ^ 

5. South Dakota ^ 

6. Massachusetts -^ 

7. Nebraska 1-^ 

8. North Dakota 1-Jj 

9. Minnesota 1-^ 

10. Connecticut 1-|^ 

11. California j-j- 

12. Oregon 1-1 

13. Idaho ■!■'}■ 

14. Utah 1-2 

15. Iowa j--^ 

16. Kansas ^•' 

17. New York j-^ 

18. Wisconsin 1-^ 

19. Rhode Island ^-^ 

20. New Hampshire ^-^ 

21. New Jersey ^-^ 

22. Colorado ^-^ 

23. Michigan ^-^ 

24. Pennsylvania ^-^ 

25. Oklahoma 2.7 

26. Illinois 2.» 

27. Maine ^-J 

28. Ohio ^-^ 

29. Vermont 4.1 

30. Indiana J^ 

31. Arizona ^"^ 

32. Maryland |-1 

33. Missouri ^.4 

34. Texas £-° 



35. Delaware 



7.1 



36. Mississippi ^-1 

37. Florida ^°-^ 

10.5 



38. Arkansas 

39. Indian Territory 10.^ 

40. Georgia 11-| 

41. Virginia ^^-^ 

42. South Carolina 1^-^ 

43. Alabama 1J° 

44. Tennessee 1^-1 

45. Kentucky 14-^ 

46. Louisiana l^-^ 

47. North Carolina 18-9 

48. New Mexico 23.6 



(12) 



The next table puts us really at the bottom 
of the list. The children who actually- go to 
school in this state attend just long enough to 
be equivalent to two months for all the chil- 
dren of school age in the state. In other 
words, we are making a desperate effort to 
educate children who are not in school. 



(13) 

AVERAGE NUMBER OP DAYS' ATTEND- 
ANCE FOR EVERY CHILD OF 
SCHOOL AGE IN 1907-8. 

1. Washington 147.6 

2. California 122.4 

3. Nevada 119.2 

4. Massachusetts 116.4 

5. Idaho 115.0 

6. Colorado 109.5 

7. Connecticut 109.1 

8. Nebraska 103.1 

9. Michigan 103.0 

10. New York 99.3 

11. Iowa 98.7 

12. Oresron 98.2 

13. Vermont 96.8 

14. New Jersey 96.3 

15. Rhode Island „ 95.0 

16. Utah 94.5 

17. Kansas 88.7 

18. Delaware 88.0 

19. Indiana 87.8 

20. Ohio 87.3 

21. Illinois 84.8 

22. Pennsylvania 84.5 

23. Montana 83.7 

24. New Hampshire 82.7 

25. Wyoming 82.6 

26. North Dakota 81.4 

27. South Dakota 77.5 

28. Maine 76.0 

29. Wisconsin _ 75.3 

30. Minnesota 75.3 

31. Missouri 72.4 

32. Maryland 69.0 

33. West Virginia 64,9 

34. Arizona 58.8 

35. Tennessee 57.8 

36. Texas 52.9 

37. Georgia 50.5 

38. Mississippi 50.3 

39. Florida 50.1 

40. Kentucky 49.6 

41. Virginia 47.9 

42. New Mexico 45.6 

42. Oklahoma 44.8 

43. Louisiana 44.5 

45. Arkansas 44.3 

46. North Carolina 43.1 

47. South Carolina 42.8 

48. Alabama 40.7 



(14) 

Even after children are enrolled in the 
schools of Alabama this page shows that 
they attend only an average of 73 days. 

Alabamians are willing to admit that their 
children are the best and the brightest of any 
in the world, but it is complimenting them 
rather too highly to expect them to compete in 
life's battles on 73 days' schooling with other 
children who attend twice as long. 

AVERAGE NUMBER OF DAYS ATTEND- 
ED BY EACH PUPIL ENROLLED 
IN 1907-8. 

1. Massachusetts 154.0 

2. New York 148.6 

3. Rhode Island 145.5 

4. Connecticut 141.2 

5. Michigan 138.7 

6. New Jersey 137.5 

7. California 136.5 

8. Illinois 132.1 

9. Pennsylvania 129.9 

10. Indiana 127.0 

11. Utah 123.6 

12. New Hampshire 122.7 

13. Ohio 121.9 

14. Washington 121.8 

15. Vermont ......121.4 

16. Iowa 120.6 

17. Oregon 119.0 

18. Nebraska 118.3 

19. Montana 117.6 

20. Delaware 116.6 

21. Wisconsin 111.7 

22. Kansas 111.4 

23. Nevada 110.1 

24. Minnesota 108.8 

25. Colorado 108.1 

26. Maryland 106.1 

27. Missouri 104.9 

28. Idaho 103.6 

29. South Dakota 99.2 

30. Wyoming 99.1 

31. Maine 95.9 

32. North Dakota 94.8 

33. Louisiana 90.4 

34. West Virginia 87.4 

35. Arizona 84.6 

36. Georgia 83.6 

37. Kentucky 82.6 

38. Virginia 81.0 

39. Tennessee 80.9 

40. Texas 80.7 

41. Florida 76.1 

42. Alabama 73.0 

43. New Mexico 71.3 

44. Oklahoma 71.0 

45. South Carolina 69.1 

46. Mississippi 64.5 

47. North Carolina 60.9 

48. Arkansas 59.7 



(15) 

AMOUNT EXPENDED PER CAPITA OF 
TOTAL POPULATION 1907-08. 

1. Nevada $11.81 

2. Washington 10 00 

3. California 8.47 

4. North Dakota 8.37 

5. Idaho 7.59 

6. Colorado 7.10 

7. Utah 6.93 

8. Montana 6.40 

9. New York 6.37 

10. South Dakota 6.26 

11. New Jersey 6.15 

12. Massachusetts 5.93 

13. Nebraska 5.83 

14. Oregon 5.63 

15. Illinois 5.56 

16. Wyoming 5.45 

17. Minnesota 5.43 

18. Ohio 5.17 

19. Iowa 5.13 

20. Arizona 5.09 

21. Michigan 5.01 

22. Connecticut 4.79 

23. Pennsylvania 4.79 

24. Indiana 4.77 

25. Rhode Island 4.51 

26. Wisconsin 4.44 

27. Kansas 4.43 

28. Vermont 4.15 

29. Missouri 3.70 

30. New Hampshire 3.45 

31. Maine 3.13 

32. West Virginia 2.92 

33. Delaware 2,73 

34. Maryland 2.65 

35. Texas 2.57 

36. Florida 2.39 

37. Louisiana 2.24 

38. Oklahoma 2.20 

39. New Mexico 2.17 

40. Virginia 1.81 

41. Arkansas 1.71 

42. Kentucky 1.56 

43. Georgia 1.49 

44. Tennessee 1.43 

45. North Carolina 1.32 

46. Alabama 1.26 

47. South Carolina 1.07 

48. Mississippi 98 



(16) 

In 1907-8 the percentage of the whole reve- 
nue for public school purposes derived from 
local taxes was as follows: 

1. Massachusetts 94.39 per cent 

2. New York 88.45 " 

3. Rhode Island 88.41 " 

4. Kansas 87.36 " 

5. Oregon 86.03 " 

6. Iowa 84.74 " 

7. Ohio 81.81 " 

8. Pennsylvania 81.26 " 

9. Connecticut 80.43 " 

10. Missouri 77.66 " 

11. Wyoming 76.88 " 

12. New Hampshire 76.05 " 

13. South Dakota 75.97 " 

14. Vermont 75.48 " 

15. Idaho 74.30 " 

16. Nebraska 72.68 " 

17. Illinois 70.37 " 

18. Wisconsin 69.76 " 

19. Delaware 67.96 " 

20. Colorado 66.53 " 

21. Florida 66.44 " 

22. North Dakota 66.34 " 

23. Tennessee 63.73 " 

24. New Jersey 60.09 " 

25. New Mexico 59.78 " 

26. California 59.15 " 

27. Arkansas 58.80 " 

28. Maryland 58.45 " 

29. Minnesota 58.37 " 

30. Arizona 57.94 " 

31. West Virginia 55.77 " 

32. Utah 54.49 " 

33. Washington 53.82 " 

34. Virginia 50.72 " 

35. Maine 46.02 " 

36. Michigan 40.40 " 

37. Montana 30.84 " 

38. Texas 30.06 " 

39. Georgia 30.04 " 

40. Nevada 30.03 " 

41. Indiana 28.82 " 

42. South Carolina 28.65 " 

43. North Carolina 25.30 " 

44. Kentucky 23.08 " 

45. Alabama 13.95 " 

46. Louisiana 13.47 " 

47. Mississippi 10.86 " 

Oklahoma omitted. 



12; 02 



a 
be 

si 

S !=* S 
3 !^ o 

3 ^ =3 






'i^-^" 



(U 



m > S ri5 m 



_o5 S 

"3 P< 
a> 

• - o 

ft 3 <» S 
X cS O S 

"i ^ ,-, ^ 

I aJ<?i> es 



ss 



is 
as. 

S3 I 



•.^ « " 









^53 



O 



as fill 

CO lO us 1^ 1^ 



o 
at 

c 
eoco 



o3 






ar> 

C0€«- 



a 
o 

5 I 



CD 



O 






10 



o .o .Si o ■<-> 

!>.J5 .2 N o 
'3"^T3eoO 

0&3- €«- 



ta 



^ 



t« 1 
2 2 S 

a 5^ aco 



g OS 

<< 



S o 

C3«H 



Co a; 

o O 













-o^ o 
0^ 2 fl 
.ST 






o 
o 

>> 

8 

'> 



I ^ <I>_JH 









iH CO '^ 



.1 ^ 

i3 a 

to 

Q B 
Wo 

9. ^ B 
>»'-' «, s 

_Q (DO 



02 



O O 






lO o 



O fi o 






-S 



<1) CD S 
1^ 1^ (M (MCO 



Oj To 

o3 









! ft „ M 

:: 1-1 M 






.2 «s 
.5 o 



>»2 

M 5J CS 

fe s fi p 

g C« OJ o^ 

I— I fc^ M hJ^ 



S ^ CO 






_ {« ft 
fl-tf ft 

.^f (D W 
Id S'w 
t> S3 w 



5-^ 



;:i.n.;^ .li! o 0) 



CIS 



ggg § g:? ^ 



to 

<D 

p, o 
^ o 

O tt) 

-§§ 

o o 



O! 



m 



us P" CO 



SI?- 



CS >; a> pj 



a "^2 



5 =«0,g 



a 

S< S o o 

P (U M 



o <" 
COM 



B S 



|g 

^ g 
+^ CD 



tt! .^ 












S;5 

d 01 












P! .-ti 



5 I fl 



=3 



QJ O 


^^ § 






^ 


OS 


H tt! 








U5 " 


!^^ 






l>i 


,—1 0) 


§^ _So 








s and 
ch po 

$1 p 


r comm 
r high 
ient to 
per chi 
4 to 2 






§^ a 

M p 3 

&S-53 

as| 


Zli OS ro 






Sfi^S 


Im fo 

Im fo 

Suffic 

$7 

age 




0) 

Pi 


"a^S S 


0:3 (N'^ 








s^= a^ a^ 

OT) tH LO (^ rtl C^ 



o 
o 



-a 



« fl 




C fl 


fl 


ftp. 




aa 


a 


ap. 




a a 


P- 


OS es 




03 03 


03 


<U (U 




aj CD 


<U 


t> > 




> > 


> 










-(-> -u 




-1-3 +3 


-1-3 


o3 c^ 




OS OS 


03 














01 m 


tti 










be be 


i-i 


be be 


bo 


0) 0) 




(D CO 


li) 


K^l^q 


!2;h^Hj 


hJ, 



"a "a 
a a 

Oj To' 



&f) be 



O " M 



4J -(J "^ ^ 
o3 OS " &« 



03 



a 




73 


iH 




oi 


ee- 






-n 






C 




G 


03 


0) 





g, 





r:0 


c3-^ 


c; 



2 


Oj 






^ 


fl 


.,=? 




al 


xico 

rk 

aro] 


03 


03 




d; 00 


Q 


1 




^ 


-S3 


-C 


^ ^ 


^ ^t 


t.S 


OS 


Q) 


0/ 0) 


0^ 


^ 


^^ 


;<5^^ 


^.0 






o 

O 



C 03 



.s 

'o 

W 



^1 



-^3 



a> m 



CSrC g 

><! o3 Sh 











PQ 






















'o 












>) 


bi 








>> 


rQ 


.s 








O 
m 


a 


2 










o 


'3 






(U 


3 


T-\ 


J 






+i 


ft 












o 


43" 

^ 


a 
10 


M 






w 


c3 




CU 




-4-> 







oa 


02 






U5 


,£> 


■iH 




ft 




-4J 

ra 

Q 


f3 


.1 


ra 
0^ 


PS 

ft 






2 


'3 


4J 


Is 






"« 




^1 u 


^ 






03 






cS 






a 


a^ 


a '3 


a a 









10 









U3 


T-l 


(M 


(M tH 






M 













^ 


rH 










O 


€«• 










tn 










0) 












15 


t 











« 










>> 


C3 


m 




(J3 






>>! 


t^ 




'ft 




3 
o 


i'^ 









O 


o 


8 " 




^ 






a) 


5m, 
per 

None 






<u 












4-> 


>> 










« 


o 












3 
ft 




"ft 


03 






s 

o 




ft 


"ft 
ft 

03 






a 




■-J3 
03 



ft 






o 
+? 




lo 


03 






a 


a 


bo 

0) 


s a 






1-1 


U3 


1-1 




(U 






rt 






■!■:> 












c5 






C 






+3 


.2 


.a 




.S bjo 

s a 






'S 
'So 


CO 


-S 






fn 


CS 


<B 


.2 >5 






> 


^ 


^ 


■^^ 



L'BRARY OF CONGRESS 

019 757 209 7 



